128 RHETORICA dom is. Although the title highlights logos, Listening to the Logos is really wisdom's story. Emily Murphy Cope University of Tennessee, Knoxville Charles Guérin, Persona. L'élaboration d'une notion rhétorique au 1er siècle av. J.-C. - Volume I : Antécédents grecs et première rhétorique latine, Vrin, Paris, 2009 (431 pp. ISBN 978-2-7116-2234-4) - Volume II : Théorisation cicéronienne de la persona oratoire, Vrin, Paris, 2011. 474 pp. ISBN 978-2-7116-2351-8 Après la publication en 2007 de l'ouvrage de Frédérique Woerther, L'èthos aristotélicien. Genèse d'une notion rhétorique, les éditions Vrin viennent d'enrichir le catalogue de la collection « Textes et traditions » d'une vraie somme, la version publiée de la thèse de doctorat de Charles Guérin (CG), jeune chercheur spécialiste de rhétorique et d'éloquence gréco-latines. Ces deux travaux, qui, par-delà les différences de leurs objets d'étude et de leurs méthodes, sont d'une remarquable complémentarité, confirment le dynamisme et la valeur reconnue de l'école française de rhétorique ancienne, dans le sillage du Professeur Pierre Chiron. Les deux volumes que CG consacre à l'étude de la notion de persona constituent une contribution majeure tout à la fois à l'histoire de la rhétorique gréco-latine, à l'histoire des idées à Rome, à la connaissance de l'éloquence en milieu romain, à la compréhension de la pensée et de la production oratoire cicéroniennes. Le projet de CG est ambitieux et la réussite réelle : reconstituer une archéologie du savoir et de la pratique oratoires à Rome au L' siècle av. J.-C., le siècle de Cicéron, à travers la question de la mise en scène de la personne de l'orateur, élément central de la parole persuasive, question que les Romains ont approchée par l'intermédiaire d'une notion qui leur est propre : la persona. CG défend une idée forte (p.14) : « On peut voir émerger, au moyen d'une notion spécifiquement latine ... une vision englobante de l'orateur à la fois différente et comparable à celle de Yèthos grec. » Dans cette vaste enquête, conduite depuis les origines grecques (la rhétorique de l'Athènes classique) jusqu'à la fin de l'époque cicéronienne et les derniers traités de l'année 46 av. J.-C. (Brutus, De optimo genere oratoruni, Orator), c'est la question de l'émergence d'un objet nouveau dans le champ de la pensée antique qui est au cœur du projet de CG. Pour cela, l'auteur adopte une saine démarche méthodologique, qui de­ vrait guider tous les travaux sur l'antiquité gréco-romaine, et qui consiste à prendre en compte prioritairement le contexte social, culturel, institutionnel, idéologique dans lequel les idées et les œuvres littéraires ont pris forme. Un des apports majeurs d'une telle méthode est de montrer que la catégorie Reviews 129 de Vèthos, abondamment convoquée dans les travaux critiques pour analy­ ser la construction, dans l'éloquence romaine, de la figure de l'orateur, ne correspond que partiellement à celle de persona, notion que Rome a forgée pour rendre compte précisément des spécificités de la parole dans l'espace de VVrbs, parole du magistrat et parole du patronus. De fait, chacune des deux parties qui structurent le premier volume (« Le paradigme athénien : référence théorique et point de comparaison ,guillemotright pp.35-218, et« La notion de persona dans la pratique oratoire et la rhétorique des débuts du F' siècle av. J.-C. ,guillemotright pp.219-426), est inaugurée par un cha­ pitre descriptif et historique, qui analyse de manière détaillée le contexte athénien et le contexte romain de la parole, pour en mettre en évidence les points de contact et les différences. Le lecteur peut ainsi lire avec intérêt une histoire culturelle comparée qui redessine, dans le...

It has long been stated that, in Isocrates’ Helen, there seems to be an open contradiction between the author’s harsh criticism of logoi paradoxoi and the simple fact that his own encomia of Helen and Busiris appear to be specimens of that very genre. Traditionally, this contradiction has been explained by Isocrates’ need to distanciate his own work from that of his predecessors.

Reviews 121 prenda l'esempio del commente a migaeque canorae del v. 322, che Piccolomini glossa idest sonus et tuviitiis verborum tumidorum sine sueco, sine pondere, sine rebus. Lo studioso traduce «vale a dire il suono squillante di parole timide senza sueco, senza peso, senza sostanza» : se da un lato confesso di non comprendere la scelta di «parole timide» per verborum tumidorum (semmai«gonfie, roboanti,» ma si tratta con ogni probabilité di un semplice lapsus che ha indotto a leggere timidorum), dall'altro mi pare ottima la resa di sine rebus con «senza sostanza,» che contribuisce efficacemente a rimarcare 1 importanza che Piccolomini assegnava aile res, corne giustamente anche Refini sottolinea (p. 198, n. 131). Ampliando la prospettiva, si potrebbe affermare corne all'erudito senese sia estranea la possibilité di una poesía caratterizzata da un'autonomia del significante che a priori prescinda da un nesso col significato, e quindi con la realté. Questa prospettiva inizia a manifestarsi nella seconda meté del Cinquecento, quando la distanza tra verba e res si accentua per approdare poi al concettismo barocco. L'Apparato critico (pp. 217-219), un intéressante corredo di tavole (tra cui, alie pp. 222-223, uno specimen del manoscritto senese del commento oraziano), gli ludid e una ricca bibliografía concludono molto degnamente un ricco volume che, a parte qualche imprecisione e forse la tendenza (del resto típica delle tesi di laurea) a ribadire i concetti in modo talora eccessivamente analítico, si caratterizza per notevole dottrina, rigore critico e maturité di giudizio. Sergio Audano Chiavari. Italy Lucía Díaz Marroquin, La retórica de los afectos (Estudios de Literatura 110, De Música 13), Kassel: Reichenberger, 2008. 298 pp. ISBN 9783 -937734-59-0 The relationship between emotion and reason has fluctuated consistently within the Western-European territories, traditions and cultural identities. The same tension applies to the one existing between the realms of pathos and ethos. Ever since the Platonic dualism soul/body was inherited and as­ similated by the early-modern humanists, their dilemma used to consist in finding the conceptual and physical loci where the phenomenon of emotion takes place. One of this search's objectives is achieving the perfect synchro­ nization of the human spirit with the biological, visceral and even animal spheres configuring the masculine and the feminine natures. This provokes rhetorical and poetic consequences which, in the course of history, have often received severe moral condemnation. In the 21st century, emotions are generally perceived and evoked ac­ cording to psychoanalytic and post-structuralist viewpoints, deriving from Romantic perspectives which are still in force. This may lead us to forget 122 RHETORICA the sophisticated code inherited from the Platonic, Aristotelian, Galenic, and even the pseudo-Hermetic traditions which used to frame the expression of emotion before the Romanticism. Diaz Marroquin's La retórica de los afectos offers the keys necessary to understand the performance of emotion -affects, passions- within the con­ text of the Renaissance and Baroque Europe, the unmediated cultural heir of the Greek and Latin Antiquity In her own words: "Este trabajo pretende describir la noción humanista de la teoría de los afectos de ascendencia aris­ totélica y, remotamente, también hermética, desde el punto de vista de la retórica textual, de la tratadística musical y de las convenciones gestuales." (p.10). The starting point is, therefore, the actio. Diaz Marroquin's book is a detailed, systematic and interdisciplinary study on the rhetorical delivery, aiming particularly at the description of the means used by actors and protooperatic singers performing early-modern dramas. One of its strengths, in fact, consists in analyzing the vocal technique and the emotional resources a performer could employ at times prior to the generalization of the first treatises on dramatic and vocal practice. The study's approach is critical, polyhedral and eminently practical. The concepts of voice and gesture are described as the means of transmission for the emotional word, which has to do with the author's many-sided profile as an academic (philologist and musicologist) and performer (mezzosoprano). Only someone who has experienced and practiced the operatic vocal emis­ sion could identify and analyze in such...

Relying heavily on Michel Foucault's discussions of meaning-making artifacts and Cheryl Glenn's 2004 book-length work on silence, this essay places Kingston in the context of post-structuralism while also emphasizing that her “silent” form reflects the culture and power structure within which her characters live and from which Kingston comes. Kingston's The Woman Warrior expresses silence in three distinct ways: suppression by self-restraint, suppression by force, and suppression in translation. Using these three avenues of exploration, I argue that rhetorical theorists must address the silence(d) parts of language exchange in order to create fuller understandings of the meaning-making attributes of signified language use and as a means of reducing the privilege of the spoken/written. A re-exploration of a previously discussed text such as Kingston's is relevant to provide insight into this newly rejuvenated conversation about silence in rhetorical play.

Other| November 01 2012 Index to Volume 30 (2012) Rhetorica (2012) 30 (4): 461–465. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2012.30.4.461 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Index to Volume 30 (2012). Rhetorica 1 November 2012; 30 (4): 461–465. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2012.30.4.461 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2012 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2012 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

This essay introduces Lű's Annals (Lűshi chunqiu), a classical Chinese text with a wealth of material on rhetoric. Not only does the text evaluate numerous examples of persuasion and sophistry, it also lays out a system of rhetorical precepts grounded in a distinctive ontology, that of correlative cosmology. After outlining the cosmology, epistemology, and theory of language of Lű's Annals, I trace how these shape its rhetorical theory and practices. I then consider how the text itself works as a persuasive artifact in the light of its own strictures. The essay closes with some reflections on why this valuable resource for Classical Chinese rhetoric has been neglected.

Many modern scholars have studied in detail the phenomenon of vividness (gr. ἐνάργεıα; lat. evidentia) in ancient rhetorical texts; however, they have neglected to examine two important testimonies included in an Ars rhetorica ascribed to Dionysius of Halicarnassus, but in fact to be ascribed to an anonymous rhetorician who probably lived in the third century AD. In these two passages the anonymous rhetorician faces some issues concerning the stylistic evidence that have not been previously studied. He analyzes the relationship between the vividness of the text and the use of everyday language, aimed to enhance realistic effects of discourse. This paper aims to present a detailed analysis of the comments offered by the anonymous rhetorician, that will help to define some peculiar aspects of stylistic vividness of the language in discourse.

Other| November 01 2012 Addresses of Contributors to this Issue Rhetorica (2012) 30 (4): 466–468. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2012.30.4.466 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Addresses of Contributors to this Issue. Rhetorica 1 November 2012; 30 (4): 466–468. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2012.30.4.466 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2012 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2012 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Review of What is Talmud? The Art of Disagreement, by Sergey Dolgopolski. New York: Fordham University Press, 2009.

Book Review| November 01 2012 Review: Classical Greek Rhetorical Theory and the Disciplining of Discourse, by David M. Timmerman and Edward Schiappa David M. Timmerman and Edward Schiappa. Classical Greek Rhetorical Theory and the Disciplining of Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. 192 pp. ISBN 9780521195188 Rhetorica (2012) 30 (4): 457–460. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2012.30.4.457 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Review: Classical Greek Rhetorical Theory and the Disciplining of Discourse, by David M. Timmerman and Edward Schiappa. Rhetorica 1 November 2012; 30 (4): 457–460. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2012.30.4.457 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2012 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2012 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| November 01 2012 Review: The Art of Eloquence: Byron, Dickens, Tennyson, Joyce, by Matthew Bevis Matthew Bevis, The Art of Eloquence: Byron, Dickens, Tennyson, Joyce. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. 302 pp. ISBN: 9780199593224 Rhetorica (2012) 30 (4): 433–436. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2012.30.4.433 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Review: The Art of Eloquence: Byron, Dickens, Tennyson, Joyce, by Matthew Bevis. Rhetorica 1 November 2012; 30 (4): 433–436. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2012.30.4.433 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2012 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2012 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| November 01 2012 Review: Abusive Mouths in Classical Athens, by Nancy Worman Nancy Worman, Abusive Mouths in Classical Athens. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008. 385 + xii pp. ISBN 9780521857871. Rhetorica (2012) 30 (4): 451–454. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2012.30.4.451 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Review: Abusive Mouths in Classical Athens, by Nancy Worman. Rhetorica 1 November 2012; 30 (4): 451–454. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2012.30.4.451 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2012 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2012 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| November 01 2012 Review: Chiastic Designs in English Literature from Sidney to Shakespeare, by William E. Engel William E. Engel, Chiastic Designs in English Literature from Sidney to Shakespeare, (Burlington, Ashgate Publishing, 2009), 158 pp. ISBN: 9780754666363 Rhetorica (2012) 30 (4): 448–450. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2012.30.4.448 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Review: Chiastic Designs in English Literature from Sidney to Shakespeare, by William E. Engel. Rhetorica 1 November 2012; 30 (4): 448–450. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2012.30.4.448 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2012 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2012 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| November 01 2012 Review: Preaching the Inward Light: Early Quaker Rhetoric (Studies in Rhetoric and Religion 9), by Graves, Michael Graves, Michael. Preaching the Inward Light: Early Quaker Rhetoric (Studies in Rhetoric and Religion 9). Waco: Baylor University Press, 2009. 450 pp. ISBN: 9781602582408 Rhetorica (2012) 30 (4): 445–447. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2012.30.4.445 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Review: Preaching the Inward Light: Early Quaker Rhetoric (Studies in Rhetoric and Religion 9), by Graves, Michael. Rhetorica 1 November 2012; 30 (4): 445–447. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2012.30.4.445 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2012 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2012 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| November 01 2012 Review: Institutio Oratoria. Bacon, Descartes, Hobbes, Spinoza, by Jan Rothkamm Jan Rothkamm, Institutio Oratoria. Bacon, Descartes, Hobbes, Spinoza, Leiden: Brill 2009, 539 pp. ISBN: 9789004173286 Rhetorica (2012) 30 (4): 436–439. https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2012.30.4.436 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Review: Institutio Oratoria. Bacon, Descartes, Hobbes, Spinoza, by Jan Rothkamm. Rhetorica 1 November 2012; 30 (4): 436–439. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/rh.2012.30.4.436 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2012 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2012 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Reviews 457 Disagreements are often treated as differing appearances or perspectives on a singular reality (after Perelman and Obrechts-Tyteka, for example) or as prompts for the invention of an agreement or unity to come. However, building on Canpanton's example, Dolgopolski's work develops a sustained and insightful construction of what might be termed Talmudic rationalism where the ontological entailments of expressions are drawn from the careful and charitable articulation of disagreements. As such, What is Talmud? is an important new contribution to the study of rhetoric. In addition, What is Talmud? is a necessary reorientation and elaboration on current studies of Rabbinic discourse and textuality, which has been dominated by praise for Rabbinic tolerance and appreciation of polysemy. What is Talmud? puts on the table the possibility that in accepting the Talmud as the historical anchor (if not the core symbol) for an appreciation of polysemy and multiple truths, we have done so at the expense of Talmudic understandings of disagreement. David Metzger Old Dominion University (Norfolk, Virginia) David M. Timmerman and Edward Schiappa. Classical Greek Rhetor­ ical Theory and the Disciplining of Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. 192 pp. ISBN 9780521195188 Traditional accounts of rhetoric's emergence in fifth-century Greece have encountered many recent challenges and revisions. Among these challenges, Edward Schiappa's prolific scholarship on classical rhetoric has always been exceptional. In this vein, Schiappa has long argued for the importance of a later origin of rhetoric as a distinct discipline than has been presumed. It arose as a discipline, that is - something that could be studied - he says, in the fourth-century in the wake of Plato's invention of the term rhetorike. This latest volume, coauthored with David Timmerman, continues to provoke the reader to question accepted rhetorical histories and is located well within the scholarly trajectory of Schiappa's earlier work, in particular, the Beginnings of Rhetorical Theory in Classical Greece (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1999). However, by emphasizing the role of "terms of art," Classical Greek Rhetorical Theory and the Disciplining of Discourse adds a refined focus on discourse in the formation of rhetoric as a discipline. Timmerman and Schiappa explain "terms of art as bits and pieces of disciplinary jargon that have "specialized denotative functions" (p.l) for those within a distinct knowledge community. Their introductory chapter provides a nuanced theoretical and historical explanation of such terms in the context of the history of rhetoric. The authors contend that the emergence of this kind of technical vocabulary is evidence of the expansion of the available "semantic field" and of corresponding "conceptual possibilities" (p. 6) available to rhetorical practitioners. Terms of art, in this way, are a 458 RHETORICA fundamental marker of discrete knowledge communities (i.e. disciplines). Consequently, they shape "the pedagogical, political and intellectual goals of rhetorical theory" (p. 2). Rather than simply revealing the historical importance of terms of art, however, Timmerman and Schiappa endeavor also to make a "methodological intervention" in the field of history of rhetoric (p. 171). They contend that the use of terms of art as an analytic framework has the advantage of shifting "our focus to the relevant pedagogical and theoretical texts to examine how the relevant terms ... are employed in those texts" (p. 172). The origin of rhetorike as a term in the fourth century (rather than fifth) has even further implication, for the authors, when understood in this light. In this context, Rhetorike is not merely Platonic shorthand, but an essential component in the technical development of the entire rhetorical knowledge community. The book takes up a variety of case studies that are united by their focus on terms of art. The first of these studies concerns dialegesthai (dialogue or dialectic) and its assorted meanings. In considering these variations, Timmerman and Schiappa demonstrate the ways in which words can be contested in technical contexts as terms of art. By synthesizing and analyzing the philological evidence, the authors contend a sophistic conception of dialegesthai was an established term of art for the Athenian intelligentsia. Thus, Plato's refinement of the term into what we understand as dialectic challenges this earlier technical usage. Parsing the similarities and differences that emerge in...

This essay introduces Lű's Annals (Lűshi chunqiu), a classical Chinese text with a wealth of material on rhetoric. Not only does the text evaluate numerous examples of persuasion and sophistry, it also lays out a system of rhetorical precepts grounded in a distinctive ontology, that of correlative cosmology. After outlining the cosmology, epistemology, and theory of language of Lű's Annals, I trace how these shape its rhetorical theory and practices. I then consider how the text itself works as a persuasive artifact in the light of its own strictures. The essay closes with some reflections on why this valuable resource for Classical Chinese rhetoric has been neglected.

Reviews 445 Lancelot en pi ose, la polémique est muselée par les stratégies narratives et une volonté d'édification chrétienne : les opposants à la cour d'Arthur ne reçoivent pour seule réponse qu'une fin exemplaire. Pour le cheik Al-Ansari et son admirateur enthousiaste, la vérité révélée n'a rien d'une fiction. Tant que les points de vue avancés admettent la contradiction et que le débat est permis, même dans ses formes les plus agressives, l'analyse rhétorique reste un outil d'interprétation privilégié pour démystifier le discours polémique. Elle permet en outre à certains contributeurs, comme R. Micheli, Th. Her­ man, E. De Jonge, ainsi qu'aux directeurs de l'ouvrage, de proposer des hypothèses nouvelles et pertinentes qui pourront servir de jalons pour de futures recherches dans deux domaines, celui du rhétorique et du polémique, qui sont intimement liés autour du sens du combat. Benoît Sans Université Libre de Bruxelles Graves, Michael. Preaching the Inward Light: Early Quaker Rhetoric (Studies in Rhetoric and Religion 9). Waco: Baylor University Press, 2009. 450 pp. ISBN: 9781602582408 Given the challenges of working with early Quaker sermons, it's not surprising that there is relatively little work on Quaker rhetoric. Unlike the Puritans, who seemed to suffer from graphomania, early Quakers believed in impromptu preaching which means that there is a paucity of source mate­ rial for historians of rhetoric. Perhaps more troubling, early Quaker sermons were often printed by non-Quaker publishers and questions about their authenticity often arise. In Preaching the Inward Light: Early Quaker Rhetoric Graves does an admirable job working with the corpus of seventy-nine surviving Quaker sermons, situating them within a reconstruction of early Quaker theology, rhetorical theory, and die emerging transatlantic printculture . Indeed, this work needs to be read as straddling Quaker studies and the history of rhetoric as Graves speaks to both groups of scholars through­ out. For that effort alone, this work deserves special attention. Despite this achievement or perhaps because of it, this reviewer has some concerns about Graves's otherwise excellent work. Graves has long been immersed in the literature of early Quakerism and, to his credit as a craftsman, this work establishes a mastery of archival material that is rare even in the best scholarship. This study of early Quaker rhetoric fills a number of important gaps in our historical knowledge. For example, in his discussion of Robert Barclay (1648-1690), one of the most important early Quaker intellectuals, Graves claims that Barclay s under­ standing of preaching is derived from a very different model of faculty psychology from both Bacon who preceded him and Campbell who came after, which he claims is closer to modern brain science than either (pp· 446 RHETORICA 115-116). Leaving aside the questionable relationship between early modern homiletic theory and postmodern science, Graves's argument suggests that faculty psychology is far more complex and varied than many traditional his­ tories allow. Furthermore, his reconstruction of Quaker impromptu speaking theory can and should provide a guide for other scholars interested in the impromptu sermon, a genre of considerable importance in America's Great Awakening and subsequent religious revivals. The craftsmanship of this book is impressive. According Graves's on­ line profile, this work is the product of nearly forty years of research and one can detect the expertise that has gone into every footnote. Alongside the twelve analytic chapters and epilogue are the complete texts of four surviv­ ing Quaker sermons, five appendixes which examine the remaining corpus of seventeenth-century Quaker sermons, a very thorough bibliography of Quaker studies and three indices. The book is divided into four sections, each focuses on different levels of analysis and context necessary for under­ standing Quaker rhetoric. It begins with an overview of seventeenth-century rhetoric, continues with an analysis of the evolution of Quaker impromptu preaching theory, and proceeds to an examination of all seventy-nine surviv­ ing Quaker sermons and then ends with an analysis of works by key Quaker figures including Fox, Crisp, Barclay and Penn. Historians of rhetoric will likely...

Many modern scholars have studied in detail the phenomenon of vividness (gr. ἐνάργεια; lat. evidentia) in ancient rhetorical texts; however, they have neglected to examine two important testimonies included in an Ars rhetorica ascribed to Dionysius of Halicarnassus, but in fact to be ascribed to an anonymous rhetorician who probably lived in the third century AD.

Reviews Matthew Bevis, The Art of Eloquence: Byron, Dickens, Tennyson, Joyce. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. 302 pp. ISBN: 9780199593224 Heirs of the post-Enlightenment separation of ''literature" from "rhetor­ ic are likely to find the colon of Matthew Bevis's title paradoxical. Professors of "The Art of Eloquence" will not anticipate the list of nineteenth- and early twentieth-century poets and novelists that follow the colon. Professors of literature will recognize the list of writers but wonder how these literary authors have become identified with rhetoric. The separation of these dis­ ciplines, after all, turns upon a view of that period in which the emergence of the category of the aesthetic warrants separate twentieth-century specialties to study "literature" and oratory. No book I have read since Jeffrey Walker's Rhetoric cud Poetics in Antiquity does more to trouble that separation than this one, for Bevis shows not only that all these literary writers were deeply engaged by the oratory of their moments but also that their literary work might best be understood as itself both a kind of rhetoric and a criticism of rhetoric. The literary texts come into clearer focus when read as responses to the rhetoric of their times, and the oratory reveals its powers and limitations when re-presented in the less exigent reflection of poems and novels. Specialist scholars have noted in passing these writers' interests in orators of their day, but Bevis convincingly makes these interests central to the style and substance of their works. Byron was an MP engaged by the rhetoric of Burke and Sheridan as well as the parliamentary conflicts of his time. Dickens, who started as a parliamentary reporter, engaged the radical rhetoric of his time and responded especially to the parliamentary rhetoric of Bulwer-Lytton. Tennyson, a public poet in his role as Laureate, followed current parliamentary debates and engaged in extended dialogue with Gladstone. Joyce was imbued with and responsive to the rhetoric of Parnell and more radical Irish nationalists. These engagements, Bevis shows, were not incidental but formative and sustaining, making it problematic to read these writers in aesthetic isolation from them. Our recent historicisms in literary studies might well have captured some of these relationships in order to debunk the purported autonomy of the aesthetic and reassert the political investments of art, but Bevis pursues a different line of argument. He works instead to recuperate the aesthetic as a Rhetorica, Vol. XXX, Issue 4, pp. 433-468, ISSN 0734-8584, electronic ISSN 15338541 . ©2012 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights re­ served. Please direct all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press s Rights and Permissions website, at http://www.ucpressjournals.com/reprintlnfo.asp. DOI: 10.1525/RH.2012.30.4.433. 434 RHETORICA kind of rhetoric that both responds to the immediate appeal of the rhetoric it represents and makes that rhetoric available for reflective criticism and political amelioration. Although the "art" of his title is not the Aristotelian techne oriented toward persuasion but the Kantian work of art engaged in imaginative free play, he argues that we mightfocus on how writers negotiate contending political demands in and through their work, and on how the literary arena can be considered one in which political questions are raised, entertained, and tested—not only decided or 'settled'. The conflicts and divided loyalties embodied in this arena need not be construed as merely impracticable or disingenuous hedging ofbets. They might also be seen as models of responsible political conduct, for their willingness to engage with multiple and sometimes contradictory values can prepare the groundfor a richer political response, (pp. 8-9) He sets out to redeem and apply to the work of literary art the muchmaligned Arnoldian term "disinterestedness" recapturing it from its association with a "retreat into an autotelic aesthetic realm" to link it instead with the sophistic principle of in ntramqne partem (p. 10). Following Adorno, he argues that "disinterestedness is achieved not in spite, but because, of an attentiveness to other points of view. Disinterestedness stays interested even as it seeks to resist certain forms of interest, and this resistance is...

Relying heavily on Michel Foucault's discussions of meaning-making artifacts and Cheryl Glenn's 2004 book-length work on silence, this essay places Kingston in the context of post-structuralism while also emphasizing that her "silent" form reflects the culture and power structure within which her characters live and from which Kingston comes. Kingston's The Woman Warrior expresses silence in three distinct ways: suppression by self-restraint, suppression by force, and suppression in translation. Using these three avenues of exploration, I argue that rhetorical theorists must address the silence(d) parts of language exchange in order to create fuller understandings of the meaning-making attributes of signified language use and as a means of reducing the privilege of the spoken/written. A re-exploration of a previously discussed text such as Kingston's is relevant to provide insight into this newly rejuvenated conversation about silence in rhetorical play.

Reviews 441 plification, a corpus of copiousness, an encomium of invention, a well; it is difficult to read such a long book about excess and extravagance with­ out resorting to the hyperbolic. But, hyperbole aside, this is a remarkable book. It is difficult to imagine that Johnson has left much unsaid about his subject. The display of erudition can be both dazzling and daunting—and occasionally bewildering. Simply surveying the 129 pages of notes can be remarkably instructive. In telling the story of hyperbole he seamlessly inter­ weaves ancient rhetoricians, mannerist poets, Enlightenment philosophers, and post-Modern critics—sometimes in the same sentence. In Hyperboles Johnson makes a compelling, and certainly exhaustive, case that his subject "is more than a figure of style: it is a mode of thought, a way of being" (4). This formerly neglected figure is now elevated to the status of an "liber trope" situated in the very center of human consciousness. Or as Johnson puts it in a probably irresistible paraphrase of Descartes: "I hyperbolize, therefore I am" (376). Don Paul Abbott University of California, Davis L. Albert et L. Nicolas, Polémique et rhétorique de l'Antiquité à nos jours, De Boeck - Duculot, Bruxelles, 2010. ISBN: 9782801116394 La dynamique équipe du GRAL de l'Université Libre de Bruxelles consacre un nouveau volume, fort de vingt-six contributions et d'une abon­ dante bibliographie mise à jour, aux mécanismes de la polémique. L'ouvrage s'ouvre sur une synthèse claire et inspirée de la problématique abordée, qui est signée par les deux co-directeurs. Luce Albert et Loïc Nicolas y précisent d'emblée les objectifs du recueil et justifient l'intérêt d'une ap­ proche rhétorique. Aux antipodes de la vision réductrice d'une parole pure­ ment violente, échappant à tout contrôle, la polémique est ici conçue comme« un duel par les mots » , ce qui la rend disponible pour l'analyse rhétorique et discursive. Dans leur synthèse, les deux auteurs s'attachent à identifier les modalités du polémique au-delà de ses incarnations dans des polémiques par­ ticulières, qui dépassent les frontières des genres qu'elles investissent. Selon eux, la polémique met en scène, sur un terrain commun et fictionnel, deux adversaires irréconciables ainsi qu'un Tiers, qui peut être tantôt 1 arbitre, tantôt l'un des enjeux du duel. Les acteurs du conflit passent entre eux un pacte implicite qui engendre un ensemble d'attentes et d'interdits supposés, crée le cadre d'une fiction régulée et fixe les limites de violence verbale. La polémique correspond donc à une forme de rituel qui fait peser des contraintes sur les participants, mais cette ritualisation n est pas déterminée à l'avance et les contraintes sont propres à chaque polémique. Les contra­ dicteurs construisent ensemble et tentent d accaparer à tour de role le lieu de la lutte qui n'existe que comme espace d'échange. Ils entrent ainsi dans 442 RHETORICA une dynamique de surenchère qui, dans une quête perpétuelle de 1 argument décisif, les incite sans cesse à repousser les limites et à renégocier les rapports de forces établis. Dans le dialogisme à trois termes qui se met ainsi progres­ sivement en place et évolue au fil des échanges, la critique, voire 1 injure, de l'un attend la riposte de l'autre comme un besoin vital et une opposition nécessaire : il faut accepter la coexistence de l'erreur et de la vérité pour rendre possible l'entreprise d'authentification qui fera triompher la cause pour laquelle on livre ainsi bataille. Les rapports de places fonctionnent en miroir : chacun devient à tour de rôle attaquant et défenseur, doit redéfinir sa position tout en récusant celle de l'autre. Pour vaincre, il faut anticiper et pénétrer la pensée de l'adversaire afin d'en trouver les failles. Le com­ bat se déroule généralement entre deux personnages très proches sous bien des rapports, qui se reconnaissent les capacités nécessaires...

Reviews 451 Nancy Worman, Abusive Mouths in Classical Athens. Cambridge: Cam­ bridge University Press, 2008. 385 + xii pp. ISBN 9780521857871. Insult and character assassination have a long and entertaining history in the annals of rhetoric. Not only do they generate theoretical meditation but they can provide scholars and amateurs alike with the guilty (and for Aristotle, vulgar) pleasures of nicely turned invective. Nancy Worman's fascinating study allows classicists and those with more general interests in ancient rhetorical forms to follow patterns of defamation from Homer and the beginnings of preserved Greek literature to Aristotle and Theophrastus at the end of the fourth century B.C.E. Of the two possibilities adumbrated above, her work facilitates the austere rewards of the theoretical rather than enjoy­ able indulgence in multiple examples of splenetic venting. For the latter one might settle down with Thomas Conley's Toward a Rhetoric ofInsult (Chicago 2010), which, in addition to quotation of virtuosic and delectable passages of invective (starting with Cicero and proceeding through the Flugschriften of the Reformation to end with Monty Python and modern political cartoons), does a useful job in sketching multiple patterns of defamatory language and specifying the factors that constrain their operation. Conley surveys how slurs connected with social status, gender, ethnicity, sexual habits, and the practices of eating and drinking (among others) recur in multiple cultures. He is interested in how invective can be used to create group identity through assertion of communal values, but also in the use of insult to interrogate per­ ceived hierarchies. This generalist orientation makes the book a valuable introduction to the invective mode, and thus, coincidentally, an interest­ ing counterpart to Worman's specialist study. W. carefully maps out how a discourse of abuse developed around public and professional speakers in Classical Greece. This discourse was rooted in practices of commensality associated with banquet and symposium, and was further extended in drama, until it became part of the rhetorical arsenal in the public oratory of Demosthenes and Aeschines. W.'s narrative of a gradual elaboration of a critique of public speaking and the move of this critique into ancient oratory make this an important book. The body of the book is divided into six chapters, charting the devel­ opment of an iambic discourse ranging over a variety of genres. W. uses the ideas of Bourdieu, Bakhtin, and Barthes to trace the operations of social performance and figuration in invective, relying in particular on a central notion of metonymy, so that the mouth acts as an emblem (Barthes' "blazon") of behavioral excess. After a scene-setting introduction, Chapter 1 looks at iambic literature in Archaic Greek epic, lyric, and Classical tragedy, where the language of invective is deployed to regulate excess and is regularly as­ sociated with ravenous mouths and dangerous types of consumption. Thus we encounter rapacious and aggressive kings (Agamemnon in Homer is a people-eating king," 29), harsh talk connected with (potentially cannibal­ istic) battlefield savagery, and clever speaking conceived as a trade-off for food. Greed leads both to uncontrolled aggressive speech and sly rhetorical 452 RHETORICA manipulation. These two possibilities will crystallize throughout the course of the book into two broad and recurring types: on the one hand the braggart and voracious politician characterized by crude consumption, and on the other the decadent and manipulative sophist. Chapter 2 explicitly juxtaposes these two types: voracious demagogues are set against glib, effete, and decadent sophists in the comedies of Aristo­ phanes, where "male protagonists engage the culinary as the primary metaphorical register in relation to the regulation of the appetites" (81). No accident, then, that the figure of the comic butcher or cook (mageiros) also becomes prominent. Whether effete or a braggart, an excessive speaker can be imagined as one who cooks up feasts of (deceptive) speech. Yet Worman also complicates (fruitfully) her model by considering how her types are measured against female appetites. In Greek comedy, women are cautionary models for men in their desires for sex, food, and wine; thus the prattling and decadent speaker is also feminized. Sexual appetite becomes an impor­ tant factor in the figuration of public speaking, not only in terms of female desire, but also...

436 RHETORICA with are the values advocated by partisans in the public discourse of the writers' polities. The work of literature is to re-present the speech of that discourse at some distance from the exigencies of decision that it responds to and attempts to create, in the cooler, more contemplative medium of writing that "wards off the decisiveness of the tongue ... and asks us to try out its words on our tongues, so that we might develop our sense of what is at stake in the process of our decision making" (p. 265). Shifting our position in literary eloquence from that of the judge listening to the calls of deliberative or forensic arguments to decide now, we would step back to the epideictic position of the theoros, critical observer, witnessing the representation of conflicting claims without an immediate call to choose, reflecting on those representations, and taking them to heart in a way that might shape our future decisions. Bevis not only rhetoricizes the principles of New Criticism; he also exemplifies a practice of close reading that brings to the fore his authors' ambivalent responses to the public oratory of their times and links their formal devices to their rhetorical criticism. New Critical preferences for ambiguity and indirection and indecision in literature return but with a crucial difference. Sometimes the only way to voice a sufficiently complex attitude is to say two things at once; sometimes an alternative meaning can only shadow the words that declare something else; sometimes the only way to suspend unreflective calls to decision to resort to aporia—that shibboleth of the deconstructive variant of New Criticism. Professors of rhetoric and of literature have much to learn from Bevis's rhetorical criticism and from the rhetorical criticism in the literary texts he explicates. They are well worth working with and, to cite a phrase Bevis cites from Empson, well worth "working out." Don Bialostosky University of Pittsburgh Jan Rothkamm, Institutio Oratorio. Bacon, Descartes, Hobbes, Spinoza, Leiden: Brill 2009, 539 pp. ISBN: 9789004173286 The idea that rhetoric since the time of Plato has been foreign to philoso­ phy is antiquated today. Philosophy isn't aiming at empirical knowledge but providing certain conceptual distinctions by means of elucidations, which are introduced with the help of tropes and figures. An important question is how early modern philosophers reflected on the rhetorical use of language Reviews 437 to express their ideas. The book answers this question with respect to Bacon, Hobbes, Descartes and Spinoza, who appear successively on the philosophi­ cal scene in the short period from 1561 to 1679, as is shown in the instructive svnchronopsis". It was only natural that Bacon used the study of style to demonstrate his high level of education. Not originality, but familiarity with established values was a commonly accepted measure of skill. In order to adhere to good style, Descartes relied on the counsel of a rhetorician like Aemilius. At the same time Latin wasn't completely unchallenged as the one and only language of the educated anymore. Especially French proved to be an exceedingly serious competitor to the ancient languages. Spinoza's in part deliberately idiosyncratic use of Latin wasn't necessarily seen as a defect of his texts. Like many modern scientists, he committed himself to the ideal of the autonomous thinker and not of the educated reader (p. 364). Thus method is one of the most important fields of hidden effects of rhetoric in early modern philosophy. The most important result of this book is that all these effects of rhetoric are to be understood against the background of education. Bacon was well educated in oratory (p. 85). The influence of Roman rhetoric especially shows where Bacon insists on a balance between indicium and elocutio, logos and pathos, and relies on the efficiency of schemes and precepts. This fits with Bacon's strong inclination against the preference of words above matter in the "schools". The answer to "Aristotelism" had to be a new a conception of rhetoric which was at the same time dwelling on passions and actions. Rhetoric should persuade the hearer to undertake actions. The aim of rhetoric consequently is to "apply Reason to Imagination", enabling "a...

448 RHETORICA William E. Engel, Chiastic Designs in English Literaturefrom Sidney to Shakespeare, (Burlington, Ashgate Publishing, 2009), 158 pp. ISBN: 9780754666363 In his two previous books, Mapping Mortality (1995) and Death and Drama (2002), William Engel explored the role of memory and mnemonics in Renaissance literature. Chiastic Designs in English Literature from Sidney to Shakespeare is an extension of Engel's previous interests, but his project for this study focuses on +he "meaning underlying and motivating the persistence and transformations of chiasmus in the Renaissance" (12). Engel extends chiasmus beyond the classic crossing rhetorical structure and uses the category of "chiastic design" to talk about moments of echoing and doubling in the larger structural design of renaissance texts. In shifting the scale of chiasmus to consider the larger patterning of textual features Engel pushes the parameters of chiasmus as a rhetorical device to consider it as a larger rhetorical strategy. Engel argues that these larger chiastic patterns can be read as a technique for creating a type of intratextual reflexivity, or echoing about the action of the text, as well as prompting the reader to be reflective about their own experience encountering the text. In his second chapter Engel explores how situating mythical figures can be an example of chiastic design. One of the strongest offerings in this chapter is Engel's unpacking the figure of David within renaissance "allegorical imagination". Engel's intervention directs us to interrogate in novel ways the figure as not merely a reference, but rather a whole system of doubled meanings and crossings that are tied to David's struggles with his own imperfect humanity and sense of justice. The effect of these doubled inflections of idealized justice and human frailty prompt, according to Engel, nuanced philosophical reflection. This is achieved textually through points of conflict and consilience repeatedly being re-situated in relation to one another through echoes, crossings, and mirroring. To ground this assertion Engel offers a sustained treatment of the figure of David in Quarles's Divine Fancies as an illustration of a "poetics of interiority" that is based on moments that prompt the reader to look back on the action of the poem cycle. The effect of this doubling back is a layering of the situated complexity of David's experiences, both past and current to the action of the poem. The chiastic doubling of David's progress within the poem directly ties to the ars memorativa where mnemonics, like chiasmus, prompt the reflection necessary to create the connections between experience and knowledge. Engel also claims that the reader has a parallel meditative journey that is directly linked to the recursive consideration of the poem's action. In effect both David and the reader are guided through a reflexive understanding of justice, and their own fallibility, through Quarles's larger structural use of chiasmus. Engel dedicated the next chapter to the role of chiasmus in Sidney's Arcadia. By focusing on Sidney's use of architectonic chiasmus Engel aims to support his assertion that Sidney, and renaissance literacy circles more broadly, considered the symbolic to be explicitly connected to the principles Reviews 449 of ars memorativa. With this in mind, Engel aims to demonstrate that in Sid­ ney's poem chiasmus is technique that creates an ethos of loss and absence. In shifting his critical agenda regarding chiasmus away from reflective en­ gagement and towards the rhetorical processes of scaffolding an affective memory, Engel demonstrates the dexterity of chasimic design to achieve different rhetorical ends. Engel's treatment of Sidney's Arcadia traces out the poem's mnemonic framework and argues that Sidney's choice to restructure the poem was an authorial re-direction to structurally highlight an ethos of pervasive loss and searching that undergird the plot. Chiasmus in this context crosses back to demonstrate a perpetual lack or uncertainty, rather than the accretion of experience or knowledge as seen in Quarles. Engel argues that Sidney strategically created "echoes" between the eclogues and the main narrative to underscore the sense of searching that not only sup­ ports the hunt for love that the characters on all levels of the narrative are experiencing, but also prompts the reader to become psychologically...

Reviews 439 century (p. 517). Can we also conclude that classical early modern philos­ ophy did contain a (hidden) philosophy or philosophies of rhetoric in the sense of attempts to justify rhetoric? This question is important, especially with respect to Descartes and Spinoza. The answer must be negative. The results clearly show that rhetoric does not contribute to the meaning of signs in the work of these authors. Only Bacon, who grew up under nearly ideal circumstances with respect to humanist education and rhetoric, arrives at something like a philosophical theory of rhetoric. To a much lesser extend, this can still be said with respect to Hobbes, who is much more than Bacon a critic of rhetoric, but still in search of an new rhetoric. In Descartes and Spinoza we still find rhetorical education and many reflections on rhetoric (it is one of the great merits of this book to have shown this). At the same time they were convinced that rhetoric constrains the expressive power of language. The conclusion must be that the way the early modern thinkers distinguish between res and verbiuu prevents them from providing a pow­ erful theory of meaning which is the cornerstone of a philosophy of rhetoric. Not a prejudice against rhetoric, but the idea that language only provides a deficient expression of thought proves to be inconsistent with the very idea of a philosophy of rhetoric. In Descartes and Spinoza these effects are enforced by the rationalist assumption that thought is a sphere of reality to which the mind has access independently of linguistic expressions. This book thus proves to be a strong contribution to the literature. Rothkamm enables us to see the real limitations of early modern rationalism with respect to rhetoric much clearer than before. Temilo van Zantwijk Friedrich-Schiller-Universitat Jena Christopher D. Johnson, Hyperboles: The Rhetoric of Excess in Baroque Literature and Thought. Cambridge: Harvard Studies in Comparative Lit­ erature, 2010. 695 pp. ISBN: 9780674053335 According to Christopher Johnson the hyperbole is the "most infamous of tropes, whose name most literary criticism does not praise, and whose existence the history of philosophy largely ignores" (1). As a result of this neglect "no full-scale defense has been made of the Baroque's most Baroque figure. This book aims to remedy that lack" (16). And what a remedy it is. To say that this is a study on a grand scale is certainly not hyperbolic. In nearly 700 pages Johnson "moves from the history of rhetoric to the extravagances of lyric and then through the impossibilities of drama and the aporias of philosophy" (521). The grand scope of Hyperboles is made necessary by the protean role of hyperbole in discourse: "as a discursive figure integral to the success of classical and Renaissance epic, Shakespearian tragedy, Pascalian apology, as 440 RHETORICA well as the viability of the Cartesian method, it can be narrative, dialogic, or structural" (8). Thus hyperbole is no mere figure of speech but rather, says Johnson, following the lead of Kenneth Burke, it is "a 'master trope,' one that vies with metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche, and irony for our attention (3). Indeed, Burke's approach to the four "master tropes" in A Grammar of Motives might serve as a preview of Johnson's method in Hyperboles. Say Burke: "my primary concern with them here will not be with their purely figurative usage, but with their role in the discovery and description of 'the truth.' It is an evanescent moment that we shall deal with—for not only does the dividing line between tne figurative and the literal usages shift, but also the four trope shift into one another" (Grammar ofMotives, 503). The hyperbole, now rechristened a "master trope" supersedes the merely figurative. It is more than a stylistic device, so much more that at times it is difficult to say what a hyperbole is—or what it is not. It is a figurative element, to be sure, but hyperbole is also an argumentative tech­ nique, an inventional device, a philosophical critique, and ultimately a world view. In establishing the hyperbole a "master trope" Johnson begins with an examination of the place of hyperbole in the rhetorical theory of Aristotle...

454 RHETORICA speakers moved (along with a comic lexicon of abuse) from drama to oratory, surfacing also in the Platonic dialogue (although ignored for the most part by Aristotle) and proliferating in Theophrastus. Although for the sake of clarity I have focused in this review on the central opposition between the aggressive versus and the weak and decadent speaker, W. is clear that these two types exist at opposite ends of a continuum and that characteristics of one type can slide into another. Particularly welcome is her insistence that the iambic mode transcends genre. This enables her to make wideranging and successful connections between comedy, satyr play, tragedy, philosophy, and forensic rhetoric. One of the pleasures of the book is to trace the various instantiations of the paradoxical figure of Socrates from Aristophanes to Plato and Theophrastus. Socrates does not occur explicitly in the last of these, but the cumulative force of W.'s analysis compels the reader to give serious consideration to her suggestion that he is a shadowy presence in several of Theophrastus7 caricatures, the product of "a tradition of characterization that wittily assimilates to intemperate types a teacher who used his famous recalcitrance to disparage and tease haughty, boastful elites" (317). Individual readers will, of course, find places where they could desire reformulation or areas where further questions arise. I, for example, am not entirely comfortable with the contention (22) that Plato adopted the language of insult from dramatic genres—this seems to me to be perhaps an overly reductive way of formulating a process that was surely more complex. This leads in turn to problems about how informal practices of insult bleed into and from the rhetoricized versions we find in our literary texts (a reading of the treatment of invective found in Plato's Laws 934-936 would be useful here). Yet it is no insult to suggest that the book presents opportunities for future reflection; some discomfort is a small price to pay for such thoughtful and productive work. Kathryn A. Morgan University of California at Los Angeles Sergey Dolgopolski. What is Talmud? The Art of Disagreement. New York: Fordham University Press, 2009. xii + 333 pp. ISBN: 9780823229345 This book joins an increasing body of work devoted to the study of Jewish discourse. The study of Jewish rhetoric has found a place in the work of rhetoric and composition scholars who are turning their attention to the subject of non-Western or alternative rhetorics (Carol Lipson and Roberta Binkley's Ancient Non-Greek Rhetorics), as well as scholars who imagine that the conceptual integrity of the notion "Jewish perspectives" can be coherently expressed as a book (Andrea Greenbaum and Deborah Holstein's Jewish Perspectives in Rhetoric and Composition). What is Talmud? Reviews 455 also shares a concern with work in Jewish studies devoted to pedagogy (Simcha Assaf), rabbinic literary activity (Daniel Boyarin, Jeffrey Rubenstein, David Stern), historiography (Ismar Schorsch), systematic Hebrew rhetorics (Isaac Rabinowitz, Arthur Lesley) and the hermeneutical activity of textbased communities (Moshe Halbertal). While there are resources enough from which to construct a course on "Jewish discourse," the idea of teaching and studying "Jewish rhetorics" is still problematic inasmuch as there is a sense that organizing the considerable scholarly activity devoted to "Jewish discourse" under the phrase "Jewish rhetorics" is at best an anachronistic projection and, at worst, an act of violent appropriation. One way to avoid the charges of appropriation or anachronism would be to treat "rhetoric" as a set of methodologies that could be productively applied to any "text." The problem with this approach is that often the methodologies that fall under the heading of rhetoric were produced in support of philosophical or historical investigations. For this reason, others have chosen to treat rhetoric as a set of concerns, or even a predisposition to ask certain kinds of questions. The idea of "Jewish rhetorics" might, in that instance as well, avoid the violence of appropriation, but "rhetoric," then runs the risk of simply being another name for something that is being productively and more accurately examined as "discourse" or "literary activity." The concept of "Jewish rhetorics" may encounter some resistance because, in avoiding the charges of anachronism or violence, "Jewish...

As rhetoricians turn increasingly to study non-Western rhetorics, they rely on postcolonial scholarship but sometimes encounter difficulties adapting its key methods—in particular, hybridity. While it is quite clearly a necessary concept for transnational rhetorics, nevertheless its literariness, ubiquity, and vagueness about agency limit its utility In this paper I draw from relevant work in genre studies, sociolinguistics, and social constructivism to propose a new version of hybridity that can take account of hybrid rhetorical forms, account for their agency with audiences, and be accountable to stakeholders in transnational settings where rhetoricians work. I finish by applying this new method to a protestant sermon preached in Mali and noting both the successes and challenges of engaging an accountable notion of hybridity.

Book Review| August 01 2012 Review: Ortensio, by Marco Tullio Cicerone Marco Tullio Cicerone. Ortensio. Testo critico, introduzione, versione e commento a cura di Alberto Grilli: Bologna, Patron, 2010. 272 pp. ISBN: 978-88-555-3086-6. Rhetorica (2012) 30 (3): 316–319. https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2012.30.3.316 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Review: Ortensio, by Marco Tullio Cicerone. Rhetorica 1 August 2012; 30 (3): 316–319. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2012.30.3.316 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2012 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2012 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| August 01 2012 Review: [Quintilian], Die Hände der blinden Mutter (Größere Deklamationen, 6), by T. Zinsmaier T. Zinsmaier, [Quintilian], Die Hände der blinden Mutter (Größere Deklamationen, 6), Cassino: Edizioni Università di Cassino, 2009, 281 pp. ISBN: 9788883170775. Rhetorica (2012) 30 (3): 328–331. https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2012.30.3.328 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Review: [Quintilian], Die Hände der blinden Mutter (Größere Deklamationen, 6), by T. Zinsmaier. Rhetorica 1 August 2012; 30 (3): 328–331. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2012.30.3.328 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2012 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2012 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| August 01 2012 Review: Toward a Rhetoric of Insult, by Thomas Conley Thomas Conley, Toward a Rhetoric of Insult, Chicago: Chicago University Press, 2009. 132 pp. Rhetorica (2012) 30 (3): 334–337. https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2012.30.3.334 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Review: Toward a Rhetoric of Insult, by Thomas Conley. Rhetorica 1 August 2012; 30 (3): 334–337. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2012.30.3.334 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2012 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2012 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| August 01 2012 Review: The Improbability of Othello: Rhetorical Anthropology and Shakespearean Selfhood, by Joel B. Altman Joel B. Altman, The Improbability of Othello: Rhetorical Anthropology and Shakespearean Selfhood, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010). 450 pages. Rhetorica (2012) 30 (3): 319–322. https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2012.30.3.319 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Review: The Improbability of Othello: Rhetorical Anthropology and Shakespearean Selfhood, by Joel B. Altman. Rhetorica 1 August 2012; 30 (3): 319–322. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2012.30.3.319 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2012 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2012 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| August 01 2012 Review: Reason's Dark Champions: Constructive Strategies of Sophistic Argument, by C. W. Tindale C. W. Tindale, Reason's Dark Champions: Constructive Strategies of Sophistic Argument (Studies in Rhetoric/Communication), The University of South Carolina Press: Columbia, 2010. 184pp. Rhetorica (2012) 30 (3): 323–325. https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2012.30.3.323 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Review: Reason's Dark Champions: Constructive Strategies of Sophistic Argument, by C. W. Tindale. Rhetorica 1 August 2012; 30 (3): 323–325. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2012.30.3.323 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2012 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2012 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Book Review| August 01 2012 Review: Vico and the Transformation of Rhetoric in Early Modern Europe, by David L. Marshall David L. Marshall, Vico and the Transformation of Rhetoric in Early Modern Europe, ( Cambridge University Press), Cambridge &; New York, 2010. 302 pp. Rhetorica (2012) 30 (3): 331–334. https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2012.30.3.331 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Tools Icon Tools Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Review: Vico and the Transformation of Rhetoric in Early Modern Europe, by David L. Marshall. Rhetorica 1 August 2012; 30 (3): 331–334. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/RH.2012.30.3.331 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentRhetorica Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2012 by The International Society for the History of Rhetoric. All rights reserved.2012 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

316 RHETORICA important influence, as Lois Agnew has convincingly shown. All interested in eighteenth-century rhetoric will want to read Outward Visible Propriety: Stoic Philosophy and Eighteenth-Century British Rhetorics. Arthur E. Walzer University ofMinnesota Marco Tullio Cicerone. Ortensio. Testo critico, introduzione, versione e commento a cura di Alberto Grilli: Bologna, Patrón, 2010. 272 pp. ISBN: 978-88-555-3086-6. Le amorevoli cure di allievi e di amici hanno consentito di provvedere alia pubblicazione di questo importante lavoro cui Alberto Grilli ha atteso con dedizione fino agli ultimi istanti di vita, consegnando all'editore nella primavera del 2007 tutto il dattiloscritto senza pero riuscir a vedere il co­ ronamento di tanta fatica, cui oggi Leditore Pátron ha dato meritoriamente la luce. A distanza di piú di quaranta anni dalla precedente edizione (pubblicata dall'editore Cisalpino nel 1962), Grilli aveva avvertito la nécessité di riprendere in mano quel lavoro, non certo perché lo ritenesse superato ma per un'ansia sana di rivedere, correggere alcune scelte, ampliare la selezione dei frammenti, alia luce di un interesse che in lui era rimasto costante nel corso dei decenni trascorsi dalla prima edizione.1 Molto, frattanto, era successo; notevole, soprattutto, la pubblicazione nel 1976 di una nuova edizione a cura di Laila Straume-Zimmermann (Ciceros Hortensius: Bern-Frankfurt am Main, Lang). Nasceva dunque nella mente dello studioso il progetto di una nuova edizione, che solo riducendo il suo valore potrebbe essere definita una 'ri-edizione'. I segni più evidenti délia novità sono dati da un'eccellente traduzione italiana, che accompagna il testo, corredato a sua volta da note e, soprattutto, da un ricchissimo 'Profilo' (pp. 125-260), diviso in tre sezioni (cornice del dialogo, pars destruens, pars construens), vera novità del volume. Prima di entrare nel dettaglio, sará pero opportuno dire qualcosa del método con cui Grilli ha proceduto. Con un atteggiamento di prudenza per nulla autocompiaciuto lo studioso professa come elemento portante del proprio lavoro 1 incjuisitio veritatis, non Vinventio ventatis', una ricerca del«probabile senza inseguiré il possibile» (p. 260). provano alcuni interessanti contributi quali ad es. Lattanzio e Ortensio in ^PP56 , 2001, pp. 257—271; Seneca e l Hortensius, in P. Defosse (éd.), Hommages à Cari Dcrou.x, II: Bruxelles, Latomus, 2002, pp. 196-205. Reviews 317 Sotto questo profilo, significativa appare la scelta di considerare il lavoro non come «ricerca di storia della filosofía» ma piü ampiamente di «storia della cultura» , il che rende mérito dell attenzione costante che il volume riversa alia storia della ricezione del testo tanto nella cultura del tempo quanto, soprattutto, in quella seriore, con particolare riguardo alie scuole di retorica in cui il testo ricevette particolare fortuna, divenendo un modello esemplare per il nitore che lo contraddistingueva, piü che per il portato filosófico. Per paradosso é dunque la retorica a farsi solerte banditrice di un testo che é un protrettico alia filosofía. Ma entriamo nel dettaglio per offrire qualche saggio del método seguito da Grilli. Notevoli le argomentazioni riguardanti la questione annosa dei tempi di composizione. Sulla base di un paio di testimonianze epistolari ciceroniane, Puna rivolta a Varrone, Paltra ad Attico, Grilli dimostra come giá nelPaprile del 46 a.C. Cicerone avesse in mente il progetto dell'opera, anticipando in tal modo anche quanto ipotizzato da Philippson2 che riteneva certa la composizione tra Pottobre del 46 e il marzo del 45 a.C. La lettura di Grilli é particolarmente raffinata, fondandosi su un caso doppio di memoria letteraria: in una circostanza si tratta di un riferimento proverbiale alia vista di Linceo (fcnn. 9, 2, 2) che trovava spazio nel Protrettico di Aristotele (fr. 10a Ross), testo che Cicerone potrebbe aver avuto sul tavolo di lavoro in quel periodo; in un altro, la lettera ad Attico (Att. 12, 3, 1-2), PArpinate esalta Pimportanza delPamico dichiarando che nulla potrebbe tenerlo lontano da lui, nemmeno la permanenza nelle Isole dei beati. E qui Grilli vede un riferimento al fr. 110 delYHortensias, único dei casi noti in cui Cicerone faccia menzione di questo paradiso terrestre (si... in beatorum insulis immortale aevam... degere liceret). Vorrei a questo punto portare un esempio del modo con cui Grilli entra in dialogo con se stesso...

Reviews 323 C. W. Tindale, Reason's Dark Champions: Constructive Strategies of So­ phistic Argument (Studies in Rhetoric/Communication), The Univer­ sity of South Carolina Press: Columbia, 2010. 184pp. Renewed interest in the Sophists may have achieved an unbiased, if not fully acknowledged, rehabilitation of their philosophical ideas, yet what is likely their most extensive contribution to Classical civilisation, mastery in rhetorical argumentation, has so far lacked any comprehensive summary, let alone a comparison with modern theories of reasoning. Tindale analyses the standard textual evidence on the sophists' practice of reasoning to describe those strategies which may specifically be cate­ gorised as part of their rhetorical techne. However, the inherent difficulty of separating sophists and their occupation from their contemporaries and supposed opponents (as, for example, the relevant works of Isocrates and Alcidamas indicate) makes any such endeavour, however valuable it may be, necessarily tentative. The title, Reason's Dark Champions, may seem surprising, perhaps even paradoxical, considering that the essence of sophistic argumentation required public engagement and an open display of rational discourse. In the book T. follows a dual division with the first part being devoted (one would say - almost compulsorily) to the justification of sophistic practice in the face of its often distortive Platonic and Aristotelian representation, whilst the second part brings forward an appreciative account of several individual strategies. Although this may be a practical approach, it still reflects a somewhat defensive scholarly position in studying the Sophists, which may not be justified and so necessary anymore. The introductorv chapter contrasts the opinions of key classical authors and modern scholars with a view to clear the term "sophistic" of the semantic thicket that overgrew it in the past couple of centuries, as exemplified by Xenophon's De Venatione 13. He presses ahead with his point early on that all too often eristic argumentation a la Plato's Euthydemus has become the standard label for sophistic reasoning. However, refusing to understand the positive philosophical assumptions behind strategies such as the contrasting arguments will result in overlooking the relatively solid and extensive counterevidence from Gorgias to Euripides on the legitimate use of logos to reflect the contingent nature of the world and human actions. In the second chapter T. counters the regular (albeit rather vague) charge against the Sophists that they made a weaker argument the stronger. In a lu­ cid analysis of how mistranslating "make" with "make appear could mask Aristotelian or Platonic epistemological preconceptions, T. demonstrates on a particularly vivid example the general tendency of denying the Sophists of a legitimate sceptical standpoint in judging the truth of opposing claims. In fact, the arguments in Antiphon's model speeches and Protagoras's On Truth make it clear that the sophists applied pragmatic strategies, such as probabilistic arguments, to deal with matters without an appeal to abstract principles. 324 RHETORICA The next two chapters focus on the representation of sophistic tech­ niques in selected works of Plato and Aristotle. First, T. shows how the Protagorean measure-maxim and the resulting oratorical or dialectical practice focused on persuasion was incompatible with the absolutistic epistemology of Plato, which relied on dialogue and strategies such as the elenchus to clear the way for eternal Truth. The much-reviled fallacies in the Sophistical Refutations and the Euthydemus not only demonstrate the difference be­ tween the practices of real and apparent refutations, but (more importantly) bring out the conflicting approaches to reality by the sophists and Plato. In the end T. offers a highly interesting comparison of the two kinds of refuta­ tions, showing that despite fundamental differences arising from contrasting epistemological positions both strategies show striking formal similarities. In the second major part of the book T. aims at offering a list of in­ dividual techniques that could set apart the Sophists as unique innovators of argument. Confronting the problem of distinguishing sophistic practice from later rhetorical studies T. accepts rather uncritically Schiappa's distinc­ tion between the two theories of rhetoric and logos to draw a line between the Aristotelian and Protagorean idea of persuasion. That concept, although seemingly attractive, nevertheless raises more questions about the system­ atic description of evidence on Greek sophists/rhetoricians/philosophers than it solves. The...